Mermaids being investigated by the Charity Commission - thread 2

[ResisterRex]

The first thread, towards the end of which there was a discussion about having a second thread but it wasn't added:

Mermaids being investigated by the charity commission
http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4644323-mermaids-being-investigated-by-the-charity-commissionn_

There's been a new development so maybe a second thread would be useful:

Lottery pauses trans charity cash during investigation

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/c959a286-44e4-11ed-8885-043c27446b97?shareToken=6d482edb1a386656502f33453da5c230

Bloody hell. If your bar is that, as a children's charity, you're not actually committing crimes against kids, it's a fucking low bar.

I spent hours a few years back on an email warning dd1s school about mermaids. It included much of susie greens own words backed up by screen shots of her tweets etc

Links to the video where she laughs at her child's under developed body. Links to news articles where they had been ordered to stay away from a little boy.

All i got was an email asking who I was. ( I used an anonymous email so as not to make life difficult for my dd)

Years later the link is still up on the website. It's crossed out but it's still there and it still takes you to the site

When you see me walk down the street with my long blonde hair, heeled combat boots, and make up to die for, are you scared?

"You should be.

"When I walk down the street, I see people who hate me and admire me; want to kill me, and want to fuck me. They see a threat, and I see a weakness.

"I am both threat and threatened. I am the monster in your nightmares, I am the lamb for the slaughter, I am the butcher. Watch me take my knife to your throat.

"But, what if trans is threatening? What if, all along, instead of pretending thatt rans is nice and pretty and wouldn't dare hurt your precious gender, we've been yelling: yes we fucking would! In a heart beat. Give me a stage to stand on, or a website to upload a recording to, and I will cut your gender to shreds with my words like knives.

Dear god. The LSE is positively churning out violent incels at a rate of knots. And apparently all his peers called this provocative and clever.

Nasty little wanker.

If true that would make sense.

Did a search on facebook for Jacob Breslow. He's tagged in this photo from 2010. Look at his tattoo.

Universities, schools, hospitals...

Organisations which deal with the young, all taking part in a culture which paints parents especially mothers as the worst decision makers about their children's maturity and untrained adult strangers as the better option...

Even if mermaids falls, it'll still take them an age to realise that they are participating in more than identity issues...

This is what someone who understands safeguarding looks like.

Great post.

Most women get it on here and as everyone knows we're just silly mummies with hours to spend online - so if we can get it I really don't see how Mermaids with the amount of money they have and all their celebrity and other (e.g. lottery) endorsements have any excuse at all.

They MUST be held to account for their safeguarding failures.

This is a great point and one I hadn't considered before.

But yes, any kind of real word data is a problem if your movement is based entirely on the emotive bullying of others and weaponising their desire to 'be kind'.

Lottery have suspended payments to Mermaids pending result of Charity Commisions investigation. Let's hope it is not another 'Nothing to see here. Carry on'.

"But, what if trans is threatening? What if, all along, instead of pretending thatt rans is nice and pretty and wouldn't dare hurt your precious gender, we've been yelling: yes we fucking would! In a heart beat. Give me a stage to stand on, or a website to upload a recording to, and I will cut your gender to shreds with my words like knives.
.
Narcissistic male misogynist threatens violence against women: gender has been utterly rocked to its core.

Imagine thinking that women are worried you’ll attack their “gender” instead of rationally fearing you as one should rationally fear any obviously unhinged misogynist violent male.

The very notion that there is such a thing as a 'trans child' is ideological.

Posted this on the other thread and am repeating it here with a few amendments:

I looked at Mermaids safeguarding policy. Unless there's more hidden on the website that I've missed it seems massively inadequate. This organisation:

Speaks to children online and face to face?
Has stalls at adult Pride days offering sweeties to children to encourage them to engage,
Run residentials (is that correct?)
Run mixed age groups (13 - 19 I believe)
Offers children below the age of consent "advice" about body modification / drug use / surgery despite apparently not being "medical experts,
Secretly sends breast binders to children without parental consent
Openly helps children change their names without parental knowledge
Advises children to use other online platforms to avoid scrutiny
Automatically shares forum users’ email addresses with all other forum users’

Most of these activities run counter to good safeguarding practice so it's presumably impossible for them to have a detailed safeguarding policy as most of these behaviours would breach it!

Any school failing to adhere to safer recruitment practices for staff (let alone all the safeguarding breaches above) is placed into special measures by Ofsted. Why is a children's charity exempt from consequences?

This behaviour warrants a police investigation as well as the charity commission.

Yes indeed

I found this from Jo Bartosch’s article particularly illuminating about why some people might want to vociferously say ‘trans children’ are real and that they should receive unquestioning medical interventions:

a leading academic within the organisation [world professional association for transgender health, aka WPATH] was a decades-long member of a private online forum known as the Eunuch Archives, where users shared written pornographic fantasies about the castration of children

Is no one going to comment on the fact that Jacob Breslow has a tattoo of a naked young boy?

Sorry, MrsJamin, I think at this point nobody is surprised!

I put a bunch of stuff in the other thread about the Mermaids which I think is important.

The statement theyve just put out is symptomatic of the problem.

Its outsourcing due diligence and then giving a response that at the level of 'oops we got caught copying our homework off our mate and then the dog ate it' and is completely oblivious to the recent Alison Bailey pwning of Garden Court and where responsibility lies. You can't outsource due diligence. You should employ more due diligence on vetting than anyone else if you are dealing with vulnerable kids. Turning around and saying 'oh we relied on others and trusted they were doing a good enough job because they are a big organisation with a good reputation' just doesn't cut it.

They are demonstrating they aren't learning anything. They are demonstrating they aren't willing to take full responsibility.

That alone is reason for them to be investigated. It's all about protecting their reputation rather than standing up and saying we've made a massive error, our systems aren't good enough and we need to make massive changes to our attitudes towards safeguarding children as clearly we are negligent in our responsibilities here.

Obviously those that potentially leaves the trustees liable. Problem is they are even without admitting it.

No one at Mermaids is stepping up. Still.

Mermaids have issued a statement;
''All trustees and staff are subject to background checks including enhanced DBS searches, social media reviews and other due diligence. On this occasion we also placed weight on the fact his employer is a globally renowned institution that would have carried out its own checks.''
mermaidsuk.org.uk/news/statement-regarding-trustee-appointment/

The video clip that SunshineReady posted upthread is so interesting to watch now. What strikes me very powerfully is that Stephanie Davies-Arai is saying the same thing that feminists and mothers and GC people have been saying consistently since these arguments began - advocating for more research, better data, more transparency, clearer information being given to children and parents. And I'm sure if she was interviewed today she'd say pretty much exactly the same thing.

However, Susie Green is on The Truth According to Mermaids, 2016 edit. The messaging has been through several incarnations since then. Blockers 'pause puberty' and are 'completely reversible...' 'We know that conversion therapy, which is the therapy that tries to teach young children to be happy and to accept their birth gender and live as such doesn't work.' 'Daughter didn't fit in with what I expected from a typical little boy...' etc etc.

So many of these statements would now be denied, or hedged about in different language. It seems they are fast running out of linguistic trickery to disguise their agenda.

Shame on the BBC and journalists like Evan Davies for not scrutinising this earlier.

It's a thread from Rob Burley who used to work at the BBC. He retweeted Bindel article and got some pushback that the MSM haven't covered this story properly. Doesn't seem fair to pile on Rob as I think he's generally quite fair, but the fact is that MSM have let us down. This particular offshoot of his thread started with me pointing out the only person who's covered this in any great detail on TV is Andrew Doyle at GB News. Where are the in depth investigations? Steven Nolan and Stonewall apart obviously and the BBC hardly supported that podcast did they? They tried to bury it.

I do missing seeing the opening post on the previous thread: 'hoisted by their own petard'.

Made me smile every time.

They are demonstrating they aren't learning anything. They are demonstrating they aren't willing to take full responsibility.

This is a symptom of the whole trans movement. An inability to take responsibility.

They are adults and they should be putting children's safety first and their statements are all trying to deflect blame. They have a responsibility to children and they have failed as have so many others. Adults have been putting ideology before child safety for far too long.

The court cases need to come as soon as possible.

what has happened to the sussex rape crisis case?

As I said on the other thread:

In a nutshell:

There should not be a question about whether children have sexual desire because it's irrelevant.

The only thing that is relevant is that children lack the capacity to consent.

Moreover, vulnerable children and young adults - you know the type that might threaten to kill themselves - have a lower capacity to consent.

They are at risk of their vulnerability being exploited by adult agendas.

Enter Mermaids who advocate sexuality and ability to verbalise and express this from age 0 before children have full capacity. They put this before all ideas of consent.

What did anyone think would happen? The reason that there is so much uproar and dislike of Mermaids is because of this prioritisation being effectively being their stated aim. With disasterous consequences.

You CANNOT have an organisation that states children can express their sexual desires and sexual identity from age zero, without there being a problem somewhere along the line. It's impossible.

All we are seeing is the consequences of this. It needs to fully unravel. It does not need celebrity endorsement.

And then:

India Willoughby unintentionally drew attention to something important here.

India said that if you sling enough mud eventually something will stick.

Except the pattern here is that mud is sticking EVERYWHERE because the lack of safeguarding is so appallingly lacking.

It is the string that holds the entire organisation together - it is build to challenge the normal protocols of safeguarding and to remove them because it gender is more important than everything else. That's its very mission statement and its stated aims.

The arrogance of this organisation is utterly astonishing in believing that it can do what it sets out to achieve in the way it does without putting kids at risk.

Its hard to find a single standard safeguarding protocol or ethical practice that is being employed by mermaids and being used properly. THAT is the problem.

If its a controversial issue you have to be above reproach as a charity. That's lesson one. That's actually the legal role of the trustees too. Yet it's completely the opposite. Everything is at a spectacular level of incompetence. Its constantly firefiring and backtracking as failures arise in a domino effect. The level of a lack of professionalism is astonishing.

Honestly anyone who has been a trustee in the last 10 years should be thrown under the bus in failing in their legal duties.

It is rotten to the core. It's not about superficial mud on the surface.

Yes. Which is why I would like to see mainstream media asking some bloody questions. Because they have run out of answers.

They can't use the same old nonsense that they have before, because people are wising up to it, and the authorities are clamping down.

They cant say there is such thing as being born in the wrong body. They are not allowed to use gender stereotyping as a reason to be 'trans'. They're not medically qualified to deal with gender dysphoria.

So what are they actually doing, and who are they doing it to?

The extract you quoted was by one of Breslow's students, of course...!